A little while back I made some “artifact” tiles. I used a glaze process that I had not tried before, explained in Artifact Tiles Part 1 and Part 2. Take a look at those posts for the full background on how the project came about.
Anyway, I’ve made a second pass at this technique. I impressed objects into white and terracotta clay and fired them.
I then washed them with Velvet underglaze Jet Black.
When they were fired, I was happy with the appearance of the terracotta tiles as they were. I’ll show them in another post. But the white ones – no.
I decided to cover them with various Velvet underglaze colors and to try the breaking glaze on them. What did I have to lose?
I fired them and here are the results.
-
- “artifact” tiles, January 2018. All about 3″-4″.
I am lukewarm on these tiles. I think these worked out well as far as no glaze failures or kiln mishaps. But I just can’t get that excited about them. Thinking about it, it’s because I don’t much enjoy the creation process, and the results don’t thrill me enough to go through it. Lesson learned.
Claudia McGill and Her Art World 
I agree as a group they great potential.
Yes definitely some lovely items look more lovely in a group!
You are welcome😊
Pingback: Artifacts Found at My House -Two | Claudia McGill and Her Art World
I like them. I tend to be a design person. Lines. Circles etc etc.
I like the idea of these. I am not thrilled making them, I somehow feel it is too easy or something. But looking at these I see I can improve my designs, I am not used to thinking this way. I think I would be happier trying this on an object such as a pot or something rather than tiles.
Don’t be too strict on yourself! They are really good. 🙂
Thank you. Thinking more about them, and seeing that people like them, I am going to think about how I might revise the process so I enjoy it more but get similar effects. I am also thinking about trying it on more functional objects or abstract sculptures.
😉